Category: Blogs Soc

Hey xkcdHatGuy. Great video on the socialization of intelligence, I really enjoyed it and I always like hearing your thoughts and ideas on everything. Here are a few of my thoughts on just a couple of the major concepts you touched upon.

On Psychology

TLDR - I agree that improving the psychology, intelligence, practical knowledge, and life improvement skills of everyone throughout their life may be crucial.

• I agree that it is always worth getting ideas and opinions from everyone, and listening to everyone, as great ideas for ways of living and different perspectives could ultimately come from anyone or anywhere.
• I agree that improving the overall intelligence, memory, learning ability, and psychological functioning of everyone will always be very beneficial and worth pursuing instead of only focusing on or relying on tools and technological advancement.
• I agree that we can and should continue to improve the tools and ways in which we come up with, debate, organize, implement, simplify, and teach new ideas, policies, habits, practices, and ways of living which could make life and society easier, better, fairer, and happier for everyone.

On Specialization

TLDR - I wonder if having the option of specialization and using the different strengths of different people has advanced and improved civilization.

• A goal of everyone focusing on psychology or teaching everyone to truly think for themselves, on the level of being a lifelong scholar and intellectual who can come up with new ideas and practices for living, seems admirable and worth trying on some level or to a degree.
• I wonder, though, if we may underestimate how few people will ever have the time, energy, ability, and most importantly the desire, to read, learn, and ideate consistently and in depth. Many people are busy working, living, playing, socializing, and following their own interests, and may have trouble simply learning the required policies and recommended practices that they need to follow or that may make their life better or happier.
• I wonder if different people have different strengths, aptitudes, and proclivities, and that many people will always prefer to do something different, or might even find it difficult to be learning and thinking all of the time.
• I wonder if everyone can have a different purpose, role, objective, or inclination if they so desire and that every area of expertise, skill, willingness, or aptitude can contribute towards the betterment of life and society as a whole.

On Scholars

TLDR - I wonder if certain people may have a great strength as a scholar or teacher, and that it may be beneficial for different people to follow their own interests and desires.

• I wonder if it is the role of the scholar, philosopher, educator, teacher, thinker, intellectual, activist, and even politician idealistically, to specialize in forming, learning, debating, creating, and teaching ideas, policies, habits, practices, and ways of living that can improve our life and society. Like all roles, it is certainly an important one, as we know how a single idea, change, practice, or way of living can make life and society better, fairer, easier, and happier for all of us.
• I wonder if the role of both a thinker and a teacher are extremely important, but so may be the role of a person who doesn't want to think much at all, and as a general example would actually prefer to use their hands to help build homes, infrastructure, tools, or technology for everyone and feel in their element and like they are contributing.
• Therefore, I'm not sure that psychology needs to be the primary driver, be more important, or win over technology any more than physical healthcare needs to win over mental education, or enjoyable entertainment needs to win over exciting athletics, or factual scientists need to win over psychological therapists, or caring for children needs to win over building construction.

On Services

TLDR - I agree that psychology and philosophy are very important, and I wonder if scholars and educators are one important piece of a large and diverse puzzle.

• I agree that psychology and scholars may be underrated as you said, especially in our current society as it stands, and that we could certainly have more and better scholars and thinkers who have an aptitude and desire for independently or collectively thinking, learning, teaching, and implementing potentially helpful and new ideas, practices, and ways of living.
• In particular, I wonder if simplifying our ideas, best practices, long books, and mountains of information could be what leads to huge advancements and improvements in our future lives, precisely because everyone does not have the energy or time to be a scholar, the ability to learn things quickly, or the desire to spend time reading and learning constantly.
• However, I'm not sure that only psychology and philosophy, by themself and exclusively, will always lead to better improvements and happiness in our life than technology, science, healthcare, education, construction, engineering, electricians, maintenance and repairs, food and beverage production, transportation, law, journalism, history, literature, entertainment, arts, leisure, and any other social and economical activities or services which people have created or create in the future.

Thanks again for sharing another great talk with many different ideas to think about. More than anything, it's really a joy to listen to all of your different thoughts. I think you are doing an excellent job of following your passions and trying to help make your life, the lives of others, and the world a better and happier place.

The socialization of intelligence - xkcdHatGuy YouTube

September 9th, 2023

thinkist

noun

1. A person who uses their thinking and thoughts to transform their life and the world around them for the better. Their thoughts propel them to ultimately take action towards making their vision come true.
2. A person who thinks that you can turn thoughts and ideas into reality.
3. A person who understands that action, work, habits, and routines are also needed to make changes, complete tasks and projects, and achieve goals and dreams.
4. A person who thinks that action and results begin with ideas, thinking, and believing.
5. A person who values ideas, thoughts, belief, positive thinking, writing things down, and subconsciously influencing their mind as an important part of the process to complete tasks and projects, achieve goals and dreams, improve their attitude and character, get things done, and make changes in their life, the lives of others, and the world.
6. A person who values and encourages optimism, positive thinking, praising one another, and positive reinforcement. They may also devalue or discourage pessimism, negative thinking, putting people down, and negative punishment.
7. A person who may or may not appreciate the ideas of using positive thinking, affirmations, autosuggestion, imagination, writing down and reading goals, talking about their goals with others, journaling, gratitude, prayer, and focused meditation to help one improve their character, their attitude, their life, and the character, attitude, and lives of others.
8. A person who may or may not appreciate the sayings "Thoughts are things, and powerful things at that." and "Whatever the mind of man can conceive and believe it can achieve."

Updated Date - August 23rd, 2023
Original Date - May 15th, 2014

Hey Derek.

Explorer versus Leader? Both.
Perceiving versus Judging? Both.
Flexible versus Structure? Both.
Dreaming versus Planning? Both.

Nature Verus Nurture

You are likely right, but I will add that the concepts of complementarity, dualism, yin and yang, and balance are convincing and worth remembering as well. I wonder if it's not exploring that makes a bad leader, but being an excessive explorer and dreamer without having the balance of also being a leader and planner. As an example, imagine if I theorized and wrote "Drinkers are bad leaders". Yes, an excessive alcoholic who is drinking too much all of the time would probably be a bad leader. But I wonder if a person could be both a drinker and a good leader if they balance their drinking with moderation. One could even postulate that being a moderate drinker, or moderate explorer, could make someone a better leader.

Explorers are bad leaders - Derek Sivers

March 16th, 2023

This is a reply to an insightful and heartfelt video essay by xkcdHatGuy titled "Acting as the collective's psychologist for 25 minutes"

Thanks for another thoughtful video essay xkcdHatGuy. As far as your thoughts and feelings, I'm with you in many ways, and I would like to let your keen thoughts stand on their own. I feel for you and other people who feel the same way at times. So I won't go on about the parts I agree with and how astute and relatable your perceptions are here. I just really appreciate you taking the time to put together your ideas in general, and this was a fun one.

Regarding some of your thoughts, which I felt was partly about social norms, you might want to separately ponder on and ask yourself the following couple of questions. I was thinking about them and came up with them myself while listening to you. I'd be interested to hear any thoughts or answers you or others have to these questions or my thoughts on them, which I admit are likely complete nonsense and incorrect answers to the questions I bring up below.

1. Why? Why does the average person confine themselves to social norms?

Theory - Sex and the desire for physical affection is the most basic reason for following social norms and the basis for the grip that capitalism, materialism, and the economy holds upon individuals today.

I agree with you that a large majority of people seem to mainly just be trying to learn what is accepted by society and follow those rules, as opposed to living naturally or deciding for themselves how to live. As you said in regards to walking around at night, I do also get a sense that this feeling and tendency may even be amplified since the pandemic started. I wonder if this may also be partly due to some of the social issues that have continually been more prevalent in western society recently, including the treatment of minorities and women. We may be in a period where some people, and young people in particular, are staying secluded and learning inside and online a bit more than the previous few generations, instead of going out and partying to find their own boundaries and what they and others feel is acceptable within their group and society.

You will come up with your own thoughts on the answer to the question of why most people so often simply follow social norms. But one theory I might have is that the main reason for the average person to follow social norms might be singularly, or at least largely due to a desire for sex and physical affection, having a mate or multiple sexual partners, and being desired and admired by people who they are interested in sexually. You could, of course, widen this to being accepted socially in general with the goal of not becoming an outcast, but I wonder if it could even be more basic than that in reality. It might also be worth noting that for many, at least at certain times in their lives, this sexual desire may also be linked with or superseded by their separate desire to have children.

In a similar way, which might be of interest to you, I wonder if it may be that the root of capitalism and materialism could also be based on the desire for sex and procreation. The desire for sex and affection could be so fundamentally important to most animals, including humans, that capitalism exists and endures because of, and feeds on that desire to get people to follow all of society's current social norms and be slaves in order to have sex or get a mate.

Of course this theory may be completely reductive and incorrect, and the reason for people following social norms might not be as simple as our desire for sex alone, but also include other factors such as a person's need for love, platonic affection, belonging, or many other reasons, including ones that have nothing to do with social connection. But according to Occam's Razor, sometimes the theory with the fewest parameters, or the simplest explanation, may be as likely to be correct or explain the situation as well as a more complicated one.

If sex was the main reason for following most social norms or even the basis of the socioeconomic system of capitalism itself, this may explain why monks, nuns, or people who have devoted themselves to religion quite often seem to naturally be a group that abstains from sex, more so than the idea that their celibacy is because they are purposely devoting themselves to a God or because of a rule directly from God for instance. Because they are not following the social norms of regular people, including living a materialistic life and having a job as part of the proletariat and working class, they may inherently need to resign themselves to potentially not having sex, which almost all people are unwilling to do.

2. Good? Can social norms be good for society instead of restricting or detrimental?

Theory - Social norms are good if we can continually create and altruistically help lead people towards norms which promote and enhance the wellbeing of individuals and the betterment of society and the world as a whole.

While people like you and I might enjoy thinking outside the box, and therefore are always questioning social norms, you might ask yourself if norms in general are inherently bad for most people and society as a whole. For instance, is it possible that some core values and principles that you yourself hold to be your most important are themselves really just social norms in disguise as well?

Is being kind, thoughtful, and considerate of others a universal truth and inherently right, or is it actually just a social norm? Is eating healthy and educating oneself to make yourself better ingrained in all animals or are they social norms which can be cultivated within people, and have further benefitted individual humans and progressed society for groups who have felt impelled for some reason to follow the norms of a healthy lifestyle and learning useful knowledge?

Instead of thinking that all social norms are bad because most people are followers who only have the intelligence or propensity to figure out what is currently socially acceptable, I wonder if we could instead be asking what role can social norms play in making life and society better. As you eloquently described, it does seem that the majority of people and animals follow social norms currently and possibly almost always have, which may explain the power of religion and religious leaders throughout history and still today for example.

However, knowing that most people may always tend to follow social norms, what should we do with that knowledge? It seems to me that some of your most insightful thoughts and ideas tend towards figuring out not what is "right" or "true" in the universe, but what is "better" or "best" for individuals, society, and our world.

Knowing that not everyone may have the capacity to be as freethinking or enlightened as someone with your intelligence and openness, I wonder if our goal should be to continue to fight against social norms that are egregious and harmful, in order to altruistically replace them with positive norms which make life and society better, and not worry quite as much about small things that people follow which don't seriously affect their wellness or the wellbeing of others.

August 21st, 2022

Nature versus Nurture? Both.
Selfish versus Helpful? Both.
Men versus Women? Both.
Black versus White? Both.

Freewill versus Determined? Both.
Independence versus Community? Both.
Acceptance versus Improvement? Both.
Forgiveness versus Disapproval? Both.

Belief versus Action? Both.
Individual versus Collective? Both.
Rational versus Emotional? Both.
Strength versus Vulnerable? Both.

Habits versus Goals? Growth.
Personal versus Social? Harmony.
Working versus Relaxing? Balance.
Similar versus Different? Diversity.

June 8th, 2022

I wonder if society would be better if everyone was encouraged to create an official and separate public name to be known by for their work as opposed to their life, with completely different profiles and names online for each role.

What

Separation of life and work by name. Offer and encourage the creation of an official government work name of a person's choice, likely allowed anytime after a person turns 18, or legal adult age. This name would be a work, craft, professional, and business name, separate from a person's life, social, family, and personal name they were given by their parents at birth.

Why

To encourage balance in all of our lives and to provide better online discussions and focus of work and interest groups, through natural categorization and separation of topics. A person could focus on their work or crafts only under their work name and profile, and could discuss personal events and social issues under their life name and profile. You could think of it as separation of life and work, as opposed to separation of church and state.

I think this could also allow people to have a personal identity and role in life that is not linked to their profession, by keeping their original given name as their life name. It may allow everyone to see other individuals in the world as a human being first, having their own worth and value in life regardless of their specific profession, level of wealth, or employment status.

Also, I do not mean that this would be mandated as a rule of law, whereby you could not discuss life issues under your work name, or work issues under your life name. Neither am I saying that a person must create this second work name if they do not wish to do so. I am only suggesting this separate work name as a possible solution and guideline for a way of living that could possibly improve everyone's health, wellness, work, productivity, social life, and personal connection with others.

September 29th, 2021

The bar is so low.
It's dirty, laying on the ground.
We need thoughtful, caring people,
To raise it up and make the world go round.

June 20, 2018

Is it possible that the easier that life gets for humans or any species, the more likely their intelligence is to decrease?

Dogs are not very smart compared to humans obviously. They are playful and friendly. This could come from the fact that their lives have become very easy. At least most of the dogs that I mostly see, which are pets, do not have to fight for their survival, or work to get food or shelter.

If my theory is correct, then it would be unlikely that dogs which are pets would improve their intelligence, but are basically getting less intelligent as they are currently evolving. They have no need to increase their intelligence. All of their needs are taken care of. Maybe an easier life generally means that a species or animal gets friendlier and less intelligent. A harder life overall could force a species or animal to become more intelligent to survive.

I would think humans currently have an easier life now than at any time in history. I believe we also have an easier life by far than any wild animals that we don't keep as pets or keep captive for our food or other reasons. Maybe us humans as a whole could have a tough time continuing to improve our intelligence because our lives have become easier. We are possibly becoming more playful and friendly like pet dogs.

I don't think our intelligence is decreasing right now overall compared to the history of the world. It is absolutely amazing what humans have accomplished and learned in the last 200 years. I think our intelligence has increased dramatically in that time. I wonder if that will continue and if the world will keep giving us new challenges to overcome to force us to increase our intelligence.

February 13th, 2014